Are there any advantages,or are they just "look how we do it"?

As far as I know, no advantages, only disadvantages. Makes disassembly more difficult and could cause malfunctions or lock up the weapon.

I prefer them, because it's a touch OCD, and if making the spring travel not a mess really does help force transfer/wear/timing, then great.

I have no rational reason to use them, but I do.

quote:

Originally posted by matthew03:
Makes disassembly more difficult and could cause malfunctions or lock up the weapon.

This hasn't been my experience, with many thousands of rounds through my guns.

I think some people like the additional weight towards the muzzle. Other than that, I'm not sure how a FLGR improves a 1911.

I prefer the old-fashioned GI version since it does not require a wrench to field strip the gun.

quote:

Originally posted by matthew03:
As far as I know, no advantages, only disadvantages. Makes disassembly more difficult and could cause malfunctions or lock up the weapon.

This is exactly how I feel about them.

Some of mine have them, some don't. Can't tell any difference.
advantages: may put a tad more weight out front, may prevent spring binding in some instances, allows for flat wilson type spring that may help function in some cases, particularly shorter barrel designs, springs last longer.

disadvantages: fiddly to disassemble, though the wilson setup is pretty cool. Never heard of a quality one causing malfunctions. the 2 piece designs I could see problems with.

You also lose the ability to charge the weapon by pressing the plug on a table, which I have never needed to do.

I guess I'm not much of an engineer of these sorts of things. Haven't studied gyrations and the effects of barrel harmonics or anything relative to constant or progressive rifling, so I'll have to resort to the best way to figure this one out:

Infinity firearms only offers 1911s with a full length rod.

So in conclusion...

I don't have a lot of experience with 1911s, but I prefer the standard GI recoil spring/guide setup.

IIRC, there was some x-ray footage of a 1911 cycling with the GI spring setup, and it showed no kinking/bending of the spring.

The only real benefit I can see with a FLGR is shifting the balance of the gun forward, if that suits you.

It doesn't take much mechanical aptitude to imagine a spring being compressed in a wide chamber where it can spread in many directions verses a spring laterally contained so that compression is in a straight line.

So, I look at it and say give the full length rod!

I don't take my 1911's apart in the field to much and I have the necessary tools to do so at home. Also, I have the "tools" for most problems in my bag for any likely problem in the field or at the range. Don't you?

I'm a bit of a 1911 nut since I've been using it over half of its life span. So this is just my humble opinion based on my experiences. Counting all the 1911s in my safe and those I've given to my son I have around 30 of them and put around 25K-30K rounds down range with them every year. About a third have full length guide rods and the rest the standard. Other than when I go to tear them down I can honestly say I can tell no difference in the way they shoot or in spring compression. As far as the two piece version, they work as well as the single piece and have given no troubles to date. So if you like then then there is no reason not to use them but if you don't then you certainly are not at any serious disadvantage.

I for some reason like the Wilson Combat version. It does not require any tools. Is it advantageous? Not sure--I guess I just like the idea of the full length guide rod.

I have two model 1911s that I have shot with both full length guide rods and the standard short GI guide rods and I can tell no difference whatsoever in balance or the way they shoot. Perhaps my sensibilities are not sufficiently refined.

I just bought a Rock Island Armory full-size Rock model 1911 that came with a one-piece FLGR and wound up swapping it for a standard GI short guide rod and a solid plug. Pushing down on the sharp edges of an open-ended plug is about as pleasant as pressing down hard with your palm on the sharp edge of a cookie cutter. So you pretty much need a barrel bushing wrench to comfortably break down the pistol.

Reassembly on this pistol was also a pain because the end of the rod was very squared off and not at all radiused. It would not feed easily into the narrow portion of the open-ended plug. I improved this by radiusing the edges of the rod a bit.

Even after polishing the rod up, when I cycled the slide by hand I felt that it was binding a bit just before the slide returned to battery, and indeed I did have some failures of the pistol to return to battery in live fire. After swapping the FLGR for a GI short rod, function was improved.

Some thoughts. I've used them in my 1911's for over 25 years. No downside for me. On the other hand, no downside to the standard short plug either, since the guns were originally designed with those in mind.

1) Never understood the big deal on disassembly. I've used the FL rod on GM and Cmdr. Use a bushing wrench. I've never had to disassemble a 1911 in the middle of a gunfight.

2) Weight/balance. Nothing significantly different with a CARBON steel FL rod. I have a TUNGSTEN steel FL rod (very heavy) in my Wilson Pro (Cmdr). Even in a Cmdr, the change in balance/weight is noticeable.

3) Bill Wilson, in his 1984 book states: "Guide rods are a functional item. They improve reliability and usually improve accuracy slightly -- although they're rarely billed as an aid to accuracy -- by keeping everything operating the same way every time". Dated info, but good enough for me.

4) Finally, I like FL rods in the (unlikely) event of a close contact situation where you may be forced to jam the gun into a perps chest before firing. With the short plug, the slide can move back and unable to fire due to the slide being out of battery. Not a major consideration...just a freebie.

5) As others have stated, I would avoid a two-piece rod. One more FU waiting to happen. I've never met Mr. Murphy personally, but I am a firm believer in his Law: "Anything that can go wrong, will go wrong."

In summary, although I like them, there is no necessity to use FL guide rods on 1911's.

They are the dumbest thing ever invented for the 1911..Snake oil at best.

There is a reason the best custom 1911 gunsmiths do not use them. They are pointless.

quote:

Originally posted by zdog16:
There is a reason the best custom 1911 gunsmiths do not use them. They are pointless.

Define "best custom gunsmiths". I have two SVI's and each has a flgr.

The guy who originally designed the gun obviously didn't know anything.

These things are the proverbial solution in search of a problem. If you look at a picture with the gun disassembled and all the parts laid out on a table, it looks bad. But if you find a gun assembled cutaway diagram, you'll see that the gap where the spring is unsupported is only two or three coils wide. Now, if an otherwise nice, properly functioning gun came with a one-piece, I don't think I'd change it to a stock, I'd probably leave it in and not worry about it. Under no circumstances would I want a two-piece. Any screwed-together joint has the potential to unscrew, or even break due to the stress concentration at the threads. This is the same reason a one-piece cleaning rod for long guns is always preferred.

They are not needed, and are an unneeded complication.

quote:

Originally posted by jhe888:
They are not needed, and are an unneeded complication.

This.